Observations from the Alpine Tethys and Iberia–Newfoundland margins pertinent to the interpretation of continental breakup
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although the Iberia–Newfoundland and Alpine Tethys margins are of different age and ultimately had a different fate, they share remarkable similarities. Both pairs of margins show a change from initially distributed and decoupled extension to later localized, coupled and asymmetric extension that results in thinning of the crust and exhumation of subcontinental mantle. The change in the mode of extension together with the localization of deformation reflects an evolution of the bulk rheology of the extending lithosphere. In this paper we summarize the pertinent geological observations for the Iberia–Newfoundland and Alpine Tethys margins. We describe the stratigraphic evolution, the fault geometry, basin architecture, and magmatic and metamophic evolution of the two pairs of margins from initial rifting to final continental breakup. This description forms a basis for understanding the evolution of the bulk rheology and how the various processes interact during progressive lithospheric extension. For the Iberia–Newfoundland and Alpine Tethys margins initial rifting appears to be controlled by inherited heterogeneities and mechanical localization processes, whereas final rifting and lithospheric rupture is controlled by serpentinization, magmatic and thermal weakening. At other margins, these modes may interact in a different way depending on the prerift conditions and the evolution of the rheology during rifting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".